Okay, Google China Gripers, What Would YOU Do?

Judging by a spate of articles yesterday playing up the criticism of Google's decision to play by the Chinese government's rules, the view seems to persist that the company had a real alternative.  So it's time for those who continue to grumble that Google sold out to tell us what the company should have done.

Option One: Refuse to do business in China until the Chinese government adopts the First Amendment (when hell freezes over), and proclaim your moral superiority from the other side of the Pacific.  Side effects: Deny hundreds of millions Chinese users the benefits they would get from your service even without being able to search for "Taiwan."  Forego any hope of building a business in the world's biggest market AND forgo any hope of using the enormous leverage you will have once you have built that business to continually press for positive, incremental change (which, by the way, is happening slowly but surely, with or without you--which isn't to say there isn't a long way to go).

Option Two: Do what Google did.

Option Three: ?

Comments

[Missing the Point]

Option 3: Ditch the "Do No Evil" motto and the moral superiority routine, then start being consistent in your cooperation with local governments by complying with U.S. subpoenas soliciting information that may help strengthen kiddie porn legislation.

For most if not all of the Google critics, it is not the compliance with Chinese censorship standards that is bothersome, but rather Google's hypocrisy, given their attitude that they are somehow more than just another capitalist entity and are out to do all sorts of good things for the world.

The company has no problem doling out shareholders' cash to promote their employees' use of hybrid vehicles for example, but when it comes to China, suddenly it's all about what makes economic sense for shareholders.

[Patrick]

Have Google employees watch the Frontline(PBS) show on tiananmen square and the lone person standing up to a tank. Maybe Google should be the lone company standing up to China.

-Pat
Typed on my China Made Keyboard, Motherboard and Viewed on a china made flat screen.

[Shreshth Dugar]

Seems Google missed the trick to be embedded among the alleys of history, and high school kids learning about Google's
intrepid act to upheld the freedom of Speech, and Schmidt having been immortalised as an American hero for the 21st century.
On its part, Google was always associated with aspirational perfection, whether it was its search engine or its AdWords (Discount Click Fraud; it still is something downright innovative), or even its corporate policies like employee satisfaction and community or just its interface; simple, fast and wonderfully efficient.. I can go on...
I am far from a Google fanatic, nor I have Google stock, but just the point that somehow Google has for redeeming China's potential, has neglected the Hen which keeps laying the golden egg for you, the American consumer. No more Google seems infalliable, nor has it got that mystique anymore which seperated it from teh barsh capitalism of the 80's and the 90's...
It was a difficlut decision, but then Google has jsut chosen to be just another good company which creates wealth.
And I hold to my point, that this side of the pacific, still a lot more can be done,a nd every effort should have been to keep the american consumer happy, becaus etahts where you get your golden eggs from...
Cheers,
Shreshth

[Bruce L]

Option 2: Goog handled it perfectly

Personally, I think the whole fuss is silly. Politicians should mind their own business - instead of successful companies and the politics of other successful countries.

100% agree with E. Schmidt, who is GOOG to tell China how to run their country???

[TallTroll]

Missing the Point, what a load of unmitigated shit. How wrong you are.... let me count the ways

Firstly, the legislation does not relate to kiddie porn. The law is meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors, which isn't the same thing at all. Like it or not, there's plenty of porn available perfectly legally on the www, and guaranteeing that no minor will ever get access to it is impossible. The situation is the same in the real world though, some shops carry various adult materials, and despite all efforts, it is undeniable that they occasionally fall into the hands of those too young to legally view them.

Secondly, the government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches. Well, OK as far as it goes, but how exactly does determining raw numbers of searches for porn terms help you stop minors from seeing it? Or for that matter, how does a random list of URL's indexed by Google help? I'd be delighted if someone could explain that to me. U.S. District Judge James Ware seems to largely agree (you can access his written ruling here : http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fi.n.com.com%2Fpdf%2Fne%2F2006%2Fgoogle_case.pdf&siteId=3&oId=2100-1028-6051257&ontId=1023&lop=nl.ex)

After a brief perusal, it seems that even where he granted the DoJ some limited access to the information requested, he had to do half the arguing for them in order to justify it! He gives them the benefit of the doubt, after some scathing remarks about "fishing expeditions"

Thirdly, you say

>> their attitude that they are somehow more than just another capitalist entity and are out to do all sorts of good things for the world.

I don't think that "Do no evil" is equivalent to "doing all sorts of good for the world". It doesn't imply altruism in an outright way, merely expresses a wish that they should not deliberately take actions that cause unnecessary harm where possible

Fourthly, I'm also confused that you find Googles' adherence to Chinese law reprehensible. Logically, you must therefore support the right of Chinese companies to ignore any and all US laws they don't happen to agree with then.

Overall, I agree with Henrys' implied conclusion that they are doing the right thing. No, Chinese laws and customs aren't what US citizens are used to, but how is it the resposibility of any commercial entity to interfere openly in the politics of any nation state? Previous world experience with that kind of thing (East India Company, BCCI in Africa etc) has, and still does cause a lot of the worlds troubles.

I believe that China will eventually move to a political model far closer to Western ideals of democracy, because they will have no choice. But, crucially, the change will be brought about by Chinese citizens, for Chinese reasons, and eventually becoming a uniquely Chinese political system

[jemison]

Take a stand for free speech. If the Chinese are intent on bread and circuses while their country continues its repression, we shouldn't be accomplices.

[Patrick]

Bruce L you miss the point also. China laws? Human rights come first don't you think? Gitmo to China. China has a policy of economy everything goes, politics nothing goes to include freedoms that we type here about.

Its Freedom stupid. Its the Economy Stupid.

Anyone who picks GOOG and China is leaving a billion hanging out to dry. When democracy does happen in China it will be bloody. Anyone think different. GOOG empowers the government to stay in power longer. That's what they are doing. Walmart is doing the same thing. Nike etc. To deny it based on we are just a company is a joke. One man can stop a tank, one man can push civil rights one man can start World War II. One company could of stopped other companies from appeasing the China govt.

I'll die standing vs living on my knees any day. Would you?

Now appearance means a lot. It appeared the GOOG rolled over for China but fingered the USA. That happens. Its GOOG's fault on how they handled it, I wouldn't bother defending them. Try defending Bush and Katrina... he's a rain maker.

[TallTroll]

Patrick, I think you are addressing me (TallTroll) rather than Brian L. Comments here are undersigned, not oversigned.

>> China laws? Human rights come first don't you think?

No nation has an unblemished human rights record, and that includes the US. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone

>> When democracy does happen in China it will be bloody. Anyone think different.

I do. Europe has seen several bloodless (or at least almost bloodless) transitions from Communism to a more Western style of Government over the last several years, beginning with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Since China is actively moving in that direction with the active encouragement of their Government, I see no reason that they could not achieve the same

>> It appeared the GOOG rolled over for China but fingered the USA.

To me it appears that Google accept the current laws and customs of China, and told an overreaching US administration where to go, refusing to be a party to their attempted abuse of US law

[mr fuckedgoogle]

There's a travelling publisher's roadshow that goes around the country and the world every year (i believe its sponsored by houghton mifflin and a dozen other biggies, along with the new york times).

About 6 years ago, they were planning on holding a expo in beijing. The chinese government said they would be happy to let them have their convention stop there, but then gave them a list of authors and books that were not allowed to be pitched or sold or allowed into the country.

Most of them dealt with chinese history, politics, democracy, freedom, that sort of evil stuff.

The publishers all agreed........ to tell china to fuck itself. And they simply didn't take the convention there- and as far as i know haven't since.

Just because there's a buck to be made does not make re-writing history acceptable. Google is not just "following local laws" .. They are actively helping HIDE TRUTH from over a billion people so their dictator leaders can stay in power in a ruthless regime.

What SHOULD happen is the US govt should make it illegal for US companies to help the tyrants over there do anything that supresses freedom and the possibility of democracy. It used to be illegal to sell computers above a certain speed to China for DECADES because it could help them design better nuclear weapons and delivery systems. If a law such as that were passed for information, Google wouldn't have to make the choice- it could be made FOR them.

[Bruce L]

Patrick,

It's my opinion that GOOG will have little politcal impact in China, regardless of whether they do business there or not. That goes with other companies you mentioned.

For disclosure, I have no interest in GOOG, and could care less whether they are there are not.

[mr fuckedgoogle]

Talltroll, you said:

To me it appears that Google accept the current laws and customs of China, and told an overreaching US administration where to go, refusing to be a party to their attempted abuse of US law"

So you think the Chinese way of repressing any mention of the topics of "freedom" or "democracy" is just a "custom" ?

A CUSTOM? That makes it sound so cute- like a tea ceremony or something.

And if you are actually claiming that the China's regime is morally equivalent to any other country because we all have done something bad at some point, then you're just trolling. Do you even know where China is on a map, much less how they treat dissent?

[Robert]

There is a country which is a signatory to the Geneva
Convention but still openly (photographs available
upon request) tortures prisoners in third countires
beyond the reach of the press.

There is a country which wiretaps without permission
of the laws of its own country.

There is a country which lies to its own citizens on
a consistent basis.

There is a country who professes religious freedom
for other countries yet is clearly attempting to
suppress the same freedoms at home.

There is a country who enlists foreigners in its army
yet renounces immigration.

There is a country with three equal branches of
government which has just one de facto branch.

And it is not China.

[TallTroll]

>> if you are actually claiming that the China's regime is morally equivalent to any other country because we all have done something bad at some point

Not at all, there's no doubt that China's current regime is a fair way down the scale when it comes to being naughty. That said, the US is all in favour of other regimes with similarly poor records, Saudi Arabia springs to mind. The Saudis are actually much worse than China in some ways, but are officially regarded as allies in the War on Terror. Go figure

>> They are actively helping HIDE TRUTH from over a billion people so their dictator leaders can stay in power in a ruthless regime.

*sigh* I do so love talking to people who have no understanding of the Internet about Internet issues. Firstly, I would recommend reading ,this seminal thread from Webmasterworld. I don't recall whether I posted in this one, but I do remember following it very closely at the time.

After much poking around by several techies and journos, it appears that the Chinese authorities have organised China's telecomms links to the outside world such that all landline links pass through firewalls controlled by the Security Ministry, allowing them to effectively block traffic from any server outside Chinese borders whose content they don't like. Of course, any server within Chinese borders is subject to Chinese law, and could be shut down quite easily.

Note that this in no way blocks Chinese users with access to satellite communications from seeing what they like. Also, since the Ministry for State Security seems to be staffed by beaurocrats with the same firm grasp of Internet issues as the average sheep, they only blocked a handful of primary domains (google.com, altavista.com etc)

Proxy traffic was getting through just fine, allowing Chinese users to see uncensored Google results at will, as were the multitude of other domains that use google.com to supply their search results. Whilst it is true that not every Chinese user will necessarily have the knowledge necessary to access these results, I strongly suspect that those who wish to see uncensored results are of a sufficiently enquiring state of mind to be capable of finding instructions on how to do so.

>> Do you even know where China is on a map

Yes, thanks. As a British citizen, I was fortunate enough to recieve an education on the world outside my national borders :) Incidentally, one of my aunties is a history teacher who specialises in Chinese history post-1945 :)

[gevil]

Henry, it seems your "Option 2" was truncated:

Option Two: Do what Google did. That is, proclaim your moral superiority from the other side of the Pacific, yet go ahead and abandon those morals to appease the Chinese government. Oh yeah, and then treat the public like fools by pretending your decision was motivated by a desire to help the Chinese people rather than money.

[Still Inside]

People here are forgetting one thing about China: they don't have "laws" in the same way we have laws here. They don't have liberty. They don't have freedom. They don't have democracy.

Why should capitalistic businesses in the US (and elsewhere in the West) care about something as hokey-pokey as "rights"?

Here's why.

At some point, virtually anytime they feel like it, the government there will simple take GOOG's business in China away from GOOG. It won't happen in the open, it will be subtle. For instance, there might be "laws passed that make the environment more difficult for GOOG [and easier for blablabla.ch which also happens to have close ties to the government]). Anybody with half a brain and absolute power can figure out how to do it quiety.

China has done this over and over again. It's part of what started the Japanese agression towards China before WWII. Read your history.

As for the idea that democracy will "slowly take hold" in China, remember that the Tiananmen Square protests were partially organized by agents of the government. They did this in order to bring the "problem children" out in the open (so they could get rid of them, which they did).

Maybe the rulers in the government there has taken stupid pills since then, and they will just let their absolute power go peacefully. Maybe cows will fly out of my butt. Who knows.

What should GOOG have done? They should have done the risk analysis of the buisiness in China, and concluded that its not worth the risk of handing thier entire business (including that in the US since their code base is over there) to some government-protected company in China. So should MSFT, CSCO, YHOO, etc. etc.

In the shorter term, they could have differentiated their brand name from the likes of MSFT by taking a stand. They (supposedly) have plenty of huge growth opportunities in the US and rest of the world. Now from a brand perspective they are just like MSFT, except without the near infinite installed base advantage.

SI

[TallTroll]

>> they don't have "laws" in the same way we have laws here. They don't have liberty. They don't have freedom. They don't have democracy.

And a country where the guy with the most expensive lawyer tends to win is really under the rule of law, isn't it OJ? And a political system where your brother may be able to fudge a few votes to get you the presidency genuinely has democracy, doesn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not slamming the US here, it's streets ahead of most nations in terms of justice, politics etc, but seriously, grow up. Things can happen anywhere, and the US is no exception, and nor is the UK (the anti-corruption police are arresting political figures for selling honours at the moment)

>> the government there will simple take GOOG's business in China away from GOOG.

I seriously doubt that. China needs US trade far more than the US needs Chinese goods. If China start nationalising Western businesses outright, the flow of capital on which their economy currently rests will just stop. Others will stop buying their goods, and what economic progress they have made will collapse.

Even fiddling with the laws to favour Chinese businesses has drawbacks, since the rest of the world can apply pressure the other way in terms of tariffs, import restrictions and duties (the EU did this recently on shoes, for example), even outright sanctions. Anything the West buys from China, it could get from Malaysia, Indonesia etc almost as cheap.

But why should the Party care what happens to the economy? Because they put the PLA in charge of it. Almost every State owned business is run and at least part owned by the Army. Any serious reversal of economic progress is going to leave some seriously pissed off Generals with the worlds largest army under arms wondering who to blame. Do you want to be the one they poit the finger at?

>> Maybe the rulers in the government there has taken stupid pills since then, and they will just let their absolute power go peacefully.

The old men who are ideologically wedded to the absolute rule of the Party are dying off, and the "younger" (still in their 60's) generation coming through have a more pragmatic view. They have seen what has happened in other Communist states, and they know that they can't hold on to absolute power for ever. They know that a counter-revolution would be disastrous so they hope to achieve a peaceful transition such has happened elsewhere, but without destroying the Party in the process, as has happened elsewhere

>> handing thier entire business (including that in the US

Ridiculous. The revenue is almost entirel ad sales, which the Chinese can't touch. The codebase changes from week to week. Whatever supposed benefit the Chinese gain from sezing it would be gone in 6 months at the most

[Neal Lachman]

TallTroll,

>>>I believe that China will eventually move to a political model far closer to Western ideals of democracy, because they will have no choice. But, crucially, the change will be brought about by Chinese citizens, for Chinese reasons, and eventually becoming a uniquely Chinese political system

Hear, Hear. Well put.

When one knows the history of the (deservedly) proud Chinese, s/he would understand the mentality of the people and the government.

All Americanism and consumerism brought into China since Deng Xia Ping (I hope I wrote that right) has been a blessing to China in terms of economic growth as well as personal growth of the Chinese. There has been progress made, there will be progress made.

If GOOG and others were NOT to go into China, it would have been a loss to the Chinese people. The government couldn't care less about Google. It is a famous chines saying that strikes me quite appropriate here, "A Journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step."

I think capitalism (with all its businesses, goods and services) coming into the still oh-so-communist China is a great thing. Why? Again, because it benefits the people in general, the government couldn't care less.

Do we want China to be the one we know from historybooks that describe it as Mao's Garden of Evil?

Do we want to sanction/outcast China? Look what good the economic sanctions did to North Korea, Cuba, and Iraq. We can't be proud of that. We were/are helping other people to remain poor, ignorant, uninformed.

GOOG... my compliments.

[Kaleberg]

I would suggest applying social pressure against Google and other companies doing business in China, particularly those directly aiding Chinese repression. While there are intelligent engineers willing to work on a better cattle prod to use on dissidents, many would rather work on a better, or at least more morally ambiguous project. Google likes to hire the best and brightest, but there a lot of smart people out there with consciences and options.

This sounds like a soft and flaky proposal, but moral suasion had an impact on South Africa, and it had an impact on the Soviet Union. I remember when Jimmy Carter said that we should not do business with the USSR for moral reasons. He got a lot of flack for that and American farmers, who were propping up the Soviet regime by selling cheap wheat, shut down Washington DC by blocking the roads with their tractors. A few years later Ronald Reagan was nattering on about the Evil Empire and it was accepted that evil mattered. (Of course Reagan actually extended the life of the USSR, but that's another story).

There are two reasons companies should not be helping the Chinese repress human rights in China.

1) It's wrong.

2) Corporate rights and human rights are intertwined. There is a reason that our modern business world grew out of the Enlightenment. Without human and political rights there is no such thing as ownership. Right now, Google has something China wants. Google will be allowed to build a business in China, but in ten years, when some corrupt party member, or perhaps a party member concerned about Chinese security, decides that he or China wants what Google built, they will simply take it and there will not be "fuck all", as the British put it, that Google will be able to do about it.

The Enlightenment was a unique event in human history, and we have benefitted from it greatly. We ignore its lessons at our peril.

[Neal Lachman]

Kaleberg,

You are right in some parts, but very wrong in the others, especially the second last paragrapgh. In that para you presume that there may be some evildoer in China's government, while I think the opposite will happen. And you don't have to look at China for some evildoers as political top-figure. Look at how corrupt some of the Western world is, or did/do you ignore that willingly or are you simply unaware of world-politics?

Google is a micro-economic element (in China and all other countries), so it doesn't has any great importance (other than providing some tax money) to and for the Chinese government, which is more concerned about macro-economics and (geo)politics.

To blame companies and businesses to partake in an evolution (business- and economy wise) that is taking place in China (or wherever for that matter) is shortsighted. You are unaware that your good intentions are no more than armchair-philosophy while ignoring the true issue at stake here. The people of China are better served with a censored Google and controlled captitalism than none at all.

In this case matters are not just black and white.

If it were for Falung Gong issues, it would be something else. If it were Tibet issues, it would be worse. However, my dear friend, you should not compare an apple and an egg. I care about Tibet as much as Richard Gere or the Dalai Lama does, but in business sense it would make no sense for Google to stay OUT of Chine. GOOG is serving a purpose (most likely intentionally), while enhancing their own precense and furthering their own profit-bottom-line.

[Don't Be Evil]

People think Google's "Don't Be Evil" ethic is either naive (at best) or cynically manipulative (at worst). In fact, it's a pretty good way to avoid trading long-term trust and brand equity for short-term gains.

Could Google juice its earnings by selling PageRank? Of course it could, but anyone could see that would be evil (with a lowercase 'e').

Could Google blow away this quarter's consensus earnings estimate by larding the google.com homepage with blinking banner ads? Sure, but this would be a lowercase 'e' evil because it would diminish the user experience. The long-term damage to Google's carefully cultivated trust and brand would far outweigh the pennies per share they'd gain this quarter.

So why is it any different when Google compromises their mission to get access to the Chinese market? Seems to me the only difference is that the stakes are much higher for censoring political thought and enabling human rights abuses than they are for biasing search results or showing banner ads. So if Google is so scrupulous with their principles in smaller things, why not when it really matters?

Putting banner ads on the homepage would be evil with a lowercase 'e'. Using valuable engineering talent to censor legitimate thought and speech in China is Evil with an uppercase 'E'.

So my answer is Option 3: continue operating the uncensored google.com, which Google says is accessible about 90% of the time even from behind China's firewall. Also provide an uncensored google.cn, localized for China. The user experience may not be up to Google's standard, since 10% of search attempts may not get through, and response times will be slower since the servers aren't in China.

But those are evils with a lowercase 'e', while actively censoring the most critical information not only violates Google's mission to make the world's information accessible, it's also Evil with an uppercase 'E'. And the damage to Google's trust and brand, long-term, will certainly outweigh the short-term gains from compromising the values that made Google so great in the first place.

[Curt Monash]

I had a little trouble with Trackback, but my response can be found at the URL above (a specific post in the Monash Report blog).

[Curt Monash]

Correction. NOW it should be the URL above. And the second part of my response is in the URL BELOW.

Arggh.

And ironic when you consider the solution I'm proposing.

CAM

[Stuart Wood]

Don’t Do Evil?

Henry, I completely agree.

Google have been given a pretty hard time of late with its venture into China. But are they really compromising their mission of Don’t Do Evil?

I’m not so sure that they are. After all, what is the alternative – completely ignore nearly 20% of the World’s population by saying we’re not playing by your Government’s rules so we won’t engage at all. Life just isn’t like that – well not for people who want to progress and engage with different cultures from around the World and move the human race on. By isolating countries that we simply don’t agree with we get into situations where we start to dehumanise these Governments to the point where we start to think of them as alien, awful factions of people that we then learn nothing about and they in turn learn nothing from us. We don’t progress, and before you know it we are isolated from each other and paranoia and fear sets in and we are at war.

Haven’t we all at some time compromised, or more accurately adjusted, our behaviour when we have travelled abroad on holiday to accommodate local laws, customs and traditions? I certainly have. The problem for Google is how they possibly deal with these far reaching ethical and cultural tensions between their mission, “Don’t Do Evil”, and the fact that they are being complicit in holding back information which will inevitably give people in China a limited view of the world.

Well, Google isn’t censoring these people it is the Chinese government and Google are respecting their national laws. Whilst we may not like it that is what goes on in China and whilst it may be at odds with our sense of openness many Chinese people that I know love their country and their Government. They are proud of China’s history and of its vast development over the last 15 years which couldn’t have been achieved without the Chinese Government opening itself up to foreign investment and capitalism.

Whilst censorship has serious and far-reaching implications, child labour/slavery, an entirely worse evil in my view, has been prevalent in China for years. I have witnessed such atrocious factories myself, and being horrified by them and the conditions in which kids from 11 onwards work in. But what of the clothes that you wear? Can you safely say these were not produced by these forgotten children? Take a look around your house and tell me that you are 100% sure that the TV, computer, microwave or trainers that you own were produced by cheerful workers with healthcare and a fair wage. These products are produced cheaper and cheaper, at our demand, and with that they become more and more available to people with less wealth from around the world – which develops the world we live in. But what of the children that produce them? Their lives are of course consigned to the reality that they are the “human resources” that simply live, work and breathe their slavery every day of every week of every year in the most squalid and brutal of conditions. I don’t however see everyone reaching to throw their PCs and TVs out of the window in disgust at the horrors that they have been complicit in. And, if these kids, whose parents simply couldn’t afford to feed, weren’t doing this work, what would they be doing? Starvation possibly or maybe sold into the sex industry? Not an easy situation to wrestle with is it...

So, do we engage with China abiding by their laws and customs and congratulate Google’s bravery for embracing a very difficult situation or do we divorce ourselves from it and start boycotting China until they start listening to us and doing things our way? All sounds a bit arrogant to me that we somehow know best. I choose engaging with China every day, of every week, of every year, with the hope, and belief, that we can learn, progress and influence each other. As China becomes more affluent and integrated with other global cultures, and we become more knowledgeable and understanding of them, maybe then we will start to see the Government ease up on its tight reign on censorship of its people and then maybe some of the kids who are making your PCs, Clothes, TVs can begin to take greater ownership of their lives, lift themselves out of poverty, and actually be able to afford a PC to search Google, in its unabridged form. I wonder what they will make of our amazing democracy…

Google, in my view, should be applauded for engaging with the Chinese Government and having the strength to struggle with some of these incredibly complicated and challenging ethical tensions. Don’t Do Evil is something that we should all aspire to do and we should of course, where possible, avoid being complicit in the misery of others. But let’s be clear that this will not be achieved easily and a healthy mix of campaigning and commercial engagement is the way forward in my view. Anyone, of course, as I do, who has an issue with censorship or Human Rights abuse in China should write to the Chinese government and campaign against it or sign up to Amnesty Internationals http://www.irrepressible.info or visit http://www.amnesty.org

Let’s remember that the Chinese government are the lawmakers, not Google, and few of us can say we haven’t been in complicit in the misery of others, wittingly or not, sometime or other in the past. This is something that I am constantly working on minimising as I am sure Google are…